..you apparently missed the Kurd leaders coming to Washington asking W for assistance.

In 2002 the Kurds were depressed and believed Bush wouldn't follow through:

This Bush will abandon the Kurds just as fast as his father has done previously and nothing will prevent him from doing so. For this exact reason, we have noticed that whenever our Kurdish leaders visit Washington for a "meeting" with the U.S. government, this news never makes it to any types of media. They don’t want the public to know what they are saying or promising behind closed doors knowing very well that they will break their promises they make to the Kurds.

link

Bush didn't break his promise to these people.

Here's one Iraqi's feelings now. Note what he says about the Kurds:

Kurdistan, Mohamed notes, was spared bombing this time. However, since a succession of wars began in 1961 in that region, "Kurdish people have lived very bad lives." Saddam Hussein attempted to "cancel the culture of the Kurdish people - their history and citizenship," says Mohamed. Yet, "Others before him did that, too."

The comparison is very apt. Both are revolutionaries. Both faced vastly superior military forces. King George was far less of a tyrant than Saddam and less bloodthirsty to boot, and yet we found a compelling case for revolution. The French didn't join us immediately and we didn't assist the Kurds immediately either. French assistance was the turning point in our revolution and our assistance was the turning point in their revolution.

Saddam punished the Kurds as recently as 2003 for trying to overthrow him and organizing their revolution - the equivalent of our own Declaration of Independence.

Such human rights abuses were unacceptable...and we had been asked to help.

Apparently you would've told the Kurds, "Stuff a sock in it you crybabies"